JAPAN
The standpoint of the French connoisseur's eulogy is as far removed as possible from the standpoint of the Japanese themselves. The fact is that M. Gonse, who must be taken as representing the most intelligent class of Occidental students of Japanese art, rivets his attention on the work of the painter rather than on that of the sculptor; considers the pictorial motive in preference to the glyptic method. Now, as a rule with very rare exceptions, the decorative motives of Japanese sword-furniture were always supplied by painters. There exist innumerable volumes of designs from the brushes of more or less renowned artists, and to these the sculptor habitually referred for inspiration. All classes of art-artisans possessed such volumes, and were prepared to submit them for a customer's choice of motive. Hence it is that the Japanese connoisseur draws a clear line of distinction between the decorative design and its technical execution, crediting the former to the pictorial artist, the latter to the sculptor. The enthusiastic eulogies and poetic comparisons of the Sōken Kishō refer, not to the pictures chiselled on sword-guards, dagger-hafts, or hilt-tips, but to the manner of their execution. Michitaka, in common with all Japanese connoisseurs, detected in the stroke of a chisel and the lines of a graving-tool subjective beauties which appear to be hidden from the great majority of Western dilettanti. He never fell into the mistake of confusing the inspirations supplied by the decorative artist with the technical achievements of the sculptor himself. However elaborate may be the decorative design, however interesting the motive, the Japanese connoisseur never forgets to look first to the chisel work. By its quality alone he estimates the rank of a speci-
228
